GM bailout poll, yes or no? (bankrupt, workers, profit, government)

[GregW]

I'll agree to a "bailout" for the big three auto makers only if the government buys an equity share and then has representatives on the boards to help direct the product mix for the companies.

[drjones96]

Originally Posted by Nepenthe

Here are the GM products I think should/would survive in the ideal lean GM near future:

In general I think you are correct. A reduction in the product line options is in order. There aren't too many models necessarily. There are too many options within each model. I've always thought that. When you go shopping for a car they all have something different in them. This one has power locks but this one doesn't. This one has the super sound system but this one doesn't. This has this...this has that. And very seldom do you find the exact car you want....It's frustrating. A few years back I went through this looking for a truck. The conclusion was if I wanted a truck with the options I wanted it would have to come directly from the factory...basically custom made for me. But see....if they wouldn't have told me those options were available in the first place then I probably wouldn't have the desire to have them. Also there should be more of an opportunity for dealer installed options. Don't like the stereo provided? Don't like the wheels? Don't like this or that? There should be an option to install them at the time of purchase for a known cost (which is advertised up front at the top level so you don't get shafted by the local dealers). This at least means that more cars are built at the factory with identical options which saves cost there. Then outfit the local dealers with the upgrade parts.

Originally Posted by Nepenthe

-------------------------
Cadillac CTS sedan -- rear-wheel drive near-luxury sedan, V6 only, kill the V, kill the coupe
Corvette coupe -- don't call it a Chevrolet, call it a Corvette, forget the convertible, ZR1, Z06, C6R/racing effort, bring out a smaller, lighter, simpler V6 C7 Corvette with modern/retro/C3 looks

I agree with you on the CTS. It's a great car even with the V6 only. I don't get the V series. It's an attempt to make a caddy into a hot rod. mmmk. I'll pass.

OTOH...if you're looking for a Corvette....you don't really have concerns with money. I say keep the V8's. But have one standard car with a V8 (they get ok fuel economy for V8's btw) and have one high performance car...take your pick of the ZR1 or Z06. The baseline body should be the same for both the standard and the high performance cars though to cut the cost. The high performance cars could have different body panels though to help distinguish it from the others.

It's a bad idea to return to 1973 policies with the Corvette. The product is more than a car. It's a symbol of the American dream. And it still deserves to have the Chevrolet logo. It's been a Chevrolet since 1953.

Originally Posted by Nepenthe

Volt sedan -- "halo" green car/technology showcase that initially sells in small quantities (it's going to be EXPENSIVE) but leads to better things and serves to strengthen the image of GM in the average consumer's mind (but don't call it a Chevrolet)

Agree with you here that they need the Volt. I think they need to do some cost cutting measures on the car but they need it. I still think it should be a Chevrolet though. They developed it. They should get their name on it.

Originally Posted by Nepenthe

-------------------------
Chevrolet Malibu -- front-wheel drive sedan, latest model has done well in sales and comparisons/reviews, bring out new model
Chevrolet Cobalt sedan -- kill the Supercharged SS, kill the coupe, then transition this to the new Cruze
Chevrolet Beat -- work with the US government (see safety and emissions above) to be able to fast track this small car to US showrooms
-------------------------

Yeah these cars are leading the pack. No major changes here.

Originally Posted by Nepenthe

GMC truck -- I don't know much about trucks, but they should keep a truck in the lineup for fleet and work/utility purposes, but instead of having three bed lengths, seven engines, three transmissions, four differentials, three cabs, make it a basic truck that does truck things
-------------------------

As I was getting to above. There are soooo many options for trucks. Right now they've got the Colorado and the Silverado on the Chevy side and an equivalent on the GMC side. I honestly have no idea why we have GMC and Chevrolet trucks. They are the same truck whether we like it or not folks. I've had people tell me how much better GMC is than Chevy.....hmm lets see...they're built on the same frames, have the same power plants, have the same suspension, have largely the same bodies (with some minor differences in the grills/tail lights/hoods. Supposedly GMC offers better upholstery. A few years back when I was looking for trucks I honestly could tell not one bit of difference. Not one. I don't get it folks. Just merge them under Chevrolet and be done with it!

They need to offer two wheelbases for the passenger truck line. Long and Regular. This doesn't reduce the number of bed lengths they make. They still need three. But what it does do is enable them to use only two chassis's. They could have the following combinations.

Regular Wheelbase Chassis
Standard Cab/Regular Bed
Extended Cab/Short Bed

Long Wheelbase Chassis
Standard Cab/Long Bed
Extended Cab/Regular Bed
Crew Cab/Short Bed

And on the above offer two trim levels which are basically take-it or leave it packages. One that's pretty basic with manual crank windows and such. And one with convenience package with electric windows, cruise, and electric seats. But again, make it so there are some options the dealers can swap out at costs known to the consumers. (Things like tow packages, XM radio, Onstar, Leather seats, etc)

And then have the Dually/Work truck line which would basically be two options of stripped down long wheel base trucks and a handful of options for the Duallies. (I know some people like to have crazy deluxe dually trucks just because so there should be one dually truck that is a long bed crew cab with power everything)

Originally Posted by Nepenthe

SUVs: either the Traverse -- mid-size SUV remnant or the Aura -- crossover SUV remnant, not sure what to badge them
-------------------------

Small/Midsized SUV's seem to be the direction former large SUV drivers are taking. But here's a crazy idea that not too many people are thinking about these days (and haven't since the 70's): What's the matter with station wagons? If you're driving a small SUV you're nearly there anyway! They seat the same number of passengers and have about the same cargo capacity. And the cross sectional area would be lower which means less drag and better fuel economy (all things being equal). Why not forgo the small SUV's for station wagons?

The Tahoe's and Suburban's will survive. But they need to be made in fewer numbers and cut the options available. Kinda the same deal with the trucks. Make one standard model and one more upscale model that can be upgraded with dealer installed options.

The Cadillac Escalade and Escalade truck (which is the same as the Avalanche need to go). I think they are just stupid cars. Just my opinion maybe but they just don't make sense for the overall Cadillac history/vision. Caddy has always been known for making luxury CARS....not SUV's or Trucks. Nix the SUV's in their product line.

Originally Posted by Nepenthe

Sell Saab and Vauxhall off completely, eliminate the Pontiac, Buick, Hummer, Daewoo, and Saturn nameplates in the US and all model lines for them. Kill the giant SUVs and the garbage like the Aveo and all other extraneous models (Solstice, etc.). Badge the cars above Holden, Opel, and Buick in appropriate markets.

I thought Saab was considered a great car in Europe? Awe well.

Ditch Hummer. Get that bad smelling monkey off your back. Want to make some hummers for the military? Fine. But the passenger car brand...even if it did make money...is just bad for the image if nothing else.

I've owned several Pontiac cars in the past and can honestly say they are pretty good cars overall. One of them was a 2005 Grand Prix GTP. I loved that car! I was sad that we had to trade it for a mini-van when the third kid came along. I'd buy another one in a second. I suppose their product line could be split and merged with Chevy and Cadillac though. The Bonneville could go to Cadillac and the G6, G8, Solstice and Grand Prix could go to Chevy. Their minivan offering could be eliminated. I never understood why Pontiac made minivans.

Buick though? I think they need to go the way of Oldsmobile. They were both great car makers but really...if you've already got Cadillac under your banner why do you need two more similar car types? What does the Buick and Oldsmobile car line offer that Caddy doesn't? Or couldn't?

Saturn seems to have earned their name as an economy car maker. But some of their product seem to be growing outside of that box. The Skyy is confusing to me. Why would GM let that car happen? It only split sales with the Pontiac Solstice and pon'd one against the other. I say either put Saturn back in their eco car maker box or merge their product line with Chevy/Pontiac.

I agree that you've got too many name brands under one roof that make the same product. Cut the line and dumb it down to something that makes sense.

[ocnymonty]

Originally Posted by Stephan_K

Everyone will sit and criticize US auto for not building what people want, I beg to differ as the big SUV's were EXACTLY what everyone wanted for the last 10 years. And as soon as gas went through the roof, all of the sudden nobody wanted those anymore and started screaming about it. What, does everyone think US auto should be able to pull a completely different model vehicle out of their butts in the drop of a hat ? What, did everyone expect the Auto industry to have a crystal ball ? Why not right, it's obvious the rest of the world has one... I guess this GLOBAL crisis is just an illusion !

Be realistic, US auto can't fail ! It effects too many other industries WORLDWIDE. If it does The Great Depression will look like a small pullback in comparison to what will come from it !

I watched that clown Jim Cramer state with amazing clarity the 'irony' of a broker who makes $70,000 a month, claiming that $70,000 per year for a UAW employee was blashphamous. One earns a living pushing $paper... another earns a living by creating something. In the long run which is more important to America.

Anyone who believes that they would not be affected by GM and Fords demise is living in a dream. The job loss would be staggering which would put even more pressure on our housing and credit markets. I don't agree with bailouts period... in theory. But in practice every American will be adversely affected if we don't do something to get through this moment.

[Stephan_K]

Originally Posted by ocnymonty

Anyone who believes that they would not be affected by GM and Fords demise is living in a dream. The job loss would be staggering which would put even more pressure on our housing and credit markets. I don't agree with bailouts period... in theory. But in practice every American will be adversely affected if we don't do something to get through this moment.

I don't understand the way of thinking of some people that think US auto makers going by the wayside won't effect them. The US auto industry is a giant spider web that is attached to just about everything ! Like it or not it is a necessary evil !

[58robbo]

Originally Posted by Stephan_K

I don't understand the way of thinking of some people that think US auto makers going by the wayside won't effect them. The US auto industry is a giant spider web that is attached to just about everything ! Like it or not it is a necessary evil !

i don't understand that there are people out there who think that because a gm bankruptcy will affect them that the government should do the wrong thing and bail gm out. we all know that we will be adversely affected but the longer we delay the day of reckoning, the tougher it'll be!

[drjones96]

So you're saying we should just rip the bandaid off and get it overwith. It'll only sting for a while.

...only what if the bandaid is covering a gaping hole in the American economy and we start bleeding out so profusely that we cannot stop it? It's gloom and doom but I'm just saying...what if doing nothing leads down that path?

[ocnymonty]

Originally Posted by drjones96

So you're saying we should just rip the bandaid off and get it overwith. It'll only sting for a while.

...only what if the bandaid is covering a gaping hole in the American economy and we start bleeding out so profusely that we cannot stop it? It's gloom and doom but I'm just saying...what if doing nothing leads down that path?

Some people want anarchy... some people want principle regardless of the cost. They are still oblivious to the consequences of an economy with it's legs cut out from underneath it.

[Stephan_K]

Originally Posted by 58robbo

i don't understand that there are people out there who think that because a gm bankruptcy will affect them that the government should do the wrong thing and bail gm out. we all know that we will be adversely affected but the longer we delay the day of reckoning, the tougher it'll be!

Day or reckoning... Do you have some kind of crystal ball or something ? How does anyone know that GM/F/DAI will not come out of this in flying colors ?

If the Gov (AND big man Barack stands by his words of alternative energy) allows them to say f*** big oil, then these guys retool for the future and most likely end up being THE auto maker of choice worldwide... I know wishful thinking .

"adversely affected" you say... That like saying Hurricane Catrina was just a shower ! I surely DON'T want to see what happens if the REVENUE generated by US auto disappears ! THAT EFFECTS EVERYONE EVERYWHERE. NO ONE IS IMMUNE !!! If US auto goes, a huge chunk of the US might as well move to Mexico as conditions there will be better...

I said it before and I'll say it again, I would like nothing more than to see the world go BK and everyone start over. But the world is too scared to go down that road. So if things are going to get prop up, you got to go all the way with it, nothing half a$$ed... Go for broke ! If not we're all going to end up there eventually anyhow...

[Stephan_K]

Originally Posted by drjones96

So you're saying we should just rip the bandaid off and get it overwith. It'll only sting for a while.

...only what if the bandaid is covering a gaping hole in the American economy and we start bleeding out so profusely that we cannot stop it? It's gloom and doom but I'm just saying...what if doing nothing leads down that path?

Wow... you said what I said in only one sentence before me. Your good .

[goodbyehollywood]

GM has an antiquated business model. Business has changed and the union model leads to higher production costs that make it difficult for a company to compete in a global arena. Bailing them out without forcing them to change the way they do business is pointless and will only lead to infinite losses. They'll just keep bleeding money making cars that cost more than consumers are willing or able to pay. What's the next step-- socializing the manufacture of cars that people don't want to buy? Socializing the generous health benefits, pensions and inflated COLAs of the UAW, while millions of other Americans take pay cuts and do without basic health insurance and retirement benefits.

Adapt or die. There's no way around that. Continuing to do the same thing and expecting different results is insanity. The only way a bailout can work is if forces GM and other auto makers to adjust their business model to reflect changing times and evolving needs. The world has changed. America has changed, and our carmakers must, too. Else they die.